“You don't see the social benefit of exchanging dangerous, addictive poisons for medications that actually help? Marijuana saves lives. In my case, I was becoming addicted to opiates, which is extremely unhealthy and carries a risk of death and most certainly would shorten your life, AND my condition was only getting worse. If MJ is part of a solution to that problem, then I support it.”
kellygreen on Jan 6, 2014 at 15:53:17
“Chronic pain is a subspecialty of my profession, and there are LOTS of different things that they can do to manage pain beyond simply throwing opiates at the problem blindly. Whatever THC does---of legitimate medical value----there usually drugs that do it better, faster, cleaner, and with fewer side-effects. In the rare instances where that is not the case, one can buy prescription THC liquid. Which has all the same medicinal effects, but just not as good a buzz since taking it orally doesn't put the THC into the bloodstream as fast as smoking it does.
But I will agree that only in the last 20 years is medicine doing a better, and more humane job of treating chronic pain in people who are ill.”
“Why? Because apparently it leads foster parents to make comments on the internet which could result in the kids being taken away. That's why.”
ScrumHalf9 on Jan 6, 2014 at 14:12:11
“Strike one... both, you read that right, both my neurologists gave me written permission (prescriptions) to let my state (NJ) provide me with medical marijuana to help me deal with the pain and discomfort associated with my debilitating disease.”
“Our pockets are deeper than the 1% by a ratio of 35 to 65. The problem is we can't wield that power because we are victims of the campaign marketing machines that lie to us and we believe it. We could eliminate the power of the rich in one fell swoop if we could elect candidates who actually come from our population, people who are actually middle class people, who will respect their positions as a responsibility to the American people, instead of using their position against us. I know if I was elected to an office I would put aside my personal ideals and do my best to figure out what is best for the people and what they want, and how they want their lives to go. There are a lot of people like that, who run for offices - all we need to do is elect them.
By the numbers, we have a 99% votes advantage and a 65% money advantage. We could remove the 1% from power if we cared to do so.”
“Here in Colorado, I almost never see more than one of these. I think we just don't have enough of them to make clumps like that. Overnight it is -12C here, so I think they are hibernating or dead right now.”
I just found 50 google links with the same fear leitmotif, most of it aimed at the Obama administration talking away your guns (even though Obama signed a bill in his first term alllowing guns in the US National Park system)
“Our freedom is at risk at this election like never before,” LaPierre claimed at the beginning of his speech, using the same fear-mongering the NRA has depended on since Obama took office to enhance their own membership and financial contributions. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/26/328300/paranoid-nra-chief-obama-leaving-gun-owners-alone-is-conspiracy-to-take-away-guns/
"Whenever they can, wherever they can, the Democrats want to take away the rights of law abiding citizens to own and purchase a gun, a right that is guaranteed under the United States Constitution," Steele said to attendees, according to excerpts released by the Republican National Committee.
"No constitutional protection is more often ignored, distorted or disdained than the individual right to keep and bear arms," Romney will say, according to draft remarks released by his political operation.
“Who's "obsessed" with guns then? I don't even mention them and you scream about the NRA? They have nothing to do with this. Your government has been bought and paid for, and not by citizens groups like the NRA.”
MachCrit on Jan 2, 2014 at 13:19:52
“The whole, "fear the gov't" nonsense is taken right out of the NRA playbook, word for word.
“That's actually not bad. Before legalization, good stuff was usually $50 an 1/8th 'on the street' and most shops price the top quality stuff at $35 an 1/8th - that is the price medical users will pay. The additional tax for non-medical folks probably brings that up to $50 - right what the street price was many years ago, for lower quality stuff. I think you need to understand this is not the weed you smoked in college - it's completely different, much more powerful. An 1/8th lasts me about 3 weeks, and I'm a medical user, with a high tolerance. Recreational users won't need that much.”
CamelPaw357 on Jan 2, 2014 at 12:53:23
“And what I want to see, and what people are now demanding, is the full legalization of opium and opium-based products. Opium is a far better smoke than pot or hashish, far better indeed. There are still many good opium dens in Thailand and Viet Nam. It's time we have them here, right in the United States.”
“You know that we don't have anything resembling democracy in America because we fear our own government. When you have democracy, the government fears the citizens.”
Luann Moak Kreyche on Jan 2, 2014 at 12:14:04
“We now have a government that has slowly taken away our rights, mostly through un-elected bureaucrats, and is selling them back to us in the form of permits and fines, just look at the EPA as one example. And the un-elected bureaucrats don't fear re-election. They are there for life.”
“And yes, I think that better law is some personal responsibility in the corporate world. If a manager could individually be held up to scrutiny for failing to secure this system, you would see this less often. Someone out there knew this could happen and had the chance to prevent it and that person made a bad decision and IMO, they should personally be on the hook for it. This would never happen if the decision was "do you want to risk your own skin on this"”
“I guess this just irritates me because I think I know why it happened. Some devs and some managers were sitting in a meeting, and some developer said "hey, that's not secure" and some manager said "meh, the chance of that hole being exploited isn't worth the money to fix it" - I've been in that meeting more than once. I call this the Scotty problem - managers do not trust engineers because the Enterprise never blew up when Scotty said it would. Managers think engineers are whiners who overestimate effort levels (and the opposite is actually true), and if you tell them to shut up and go do it anyway, they can produce the impossible and they don't really know their own limits and you have to push them.
IMO, when software developers see a security hole, management should realize that hackers are the same kind of people, and they will see the same things. And, the last security hole you can afford to leave open is one that's obvious to the devs.”
“That would be a brute force attack against one card, which is impossible because the bank shuts down that card after a relatively small number of failed attempts, I think it's like 3 to 5 for most banks. I think we're talking about decrypting the whole list. That would require millions of tests, probably more like billions.”
“I would like some more information about this. That is a critical distinction. I've been railing on them for storing this data in the first place, but if it was captured at the point of entry, that's a way different thing. It is still Target's fault, but not as egregious as if they were storing numbers in the database.”
Owen Allen on Dec 27, 2013 at 21:28:16
“Couple things, first there is what we know, and second there is the truth. So far Target has only revealed what they have been publicly accused (and no more). An independent security firm noticed lots of credit cards which came from Targets on the black market, and then publicly accused Target of having a break-in, at which point Target revealed it (they knew about the break-in days to weeks before reveal).
The real break-in could be much, much worse than they are revealing. In this case there are no laws mandating Target reveal anything, or even tell the truth about said break-in. For all we know Target's entire database could have been breached, and all your information about you is stolen and completely unencrypted.
There is a justice department inquiry pending which will likely reveal the truth. But the dilemma is that at this moment it is basically the outside world's word versus Target. So if you take Target at their word, then it was only their Point-of-Sale system which had transactions snooped and you should cancel the card and that's probably all you need to do. Until the court cases, or a better law is passed to protect consumer identity, then we're left guessing.”
“It is absolutely their fault. They are not supposed to be storing this information in the first place - this problem is the reason why. They chose to go against the industry standard and they are suffering the consequences along with the rest of us.”
“A peaceful world is a pipe dream, and while it is something worth working towards, it is just plain stupid to act as if it already exists. I know a lot of people support being unarmed because they claim that we live in a civilized society and there is no need for violence, but that mindset denies the facts. I would love to live in a world where there was no possibility of ever needing to defend myself, but we don't live in that world, and while we should try to create that world if we can, it is simply unwise to act as if it's already here. It is also unwise to enact laws which force citizens to act on that fantasy.”
Timothy T on Dec 12, 2013 at 19:05:09
“The laws that most Americans want are ones that make it harder for those that shouldn't have gun to get them. Why allow private sales of guns? You don't know who you are selling the gun to. You may think you do but most likely not. Even sale to relatives, you may have a relative that you haven't seen or heard from in years. Do you really know whether or not he is mentally unstable or even a felon? Go to a gun show and walk up to a booth selling weapons, if they are no a licensed dealer, they can sell to anyone without a background check. This needs to stop.”
“You missed the point. Felons and other criminal types already obtain weapons without a background check, and they will simply continue to do that, and your new law will have no effect on them. If we accept that certain people will have guns and that is just a fact of human societies, the next obvious question is who do we want those people to be? If you want those people to be criminals, then go ahead and make more gun control laws, because that will be the result - criminals will continue to do what they have always done, and the people who can protect you from those criminals will be restricted. Do you see how that shifts power the wrong direction?
Pay attention to what the gun control people are saying. They are very clearly saying "we are the ones who should have the guns, not you." Look at who the gun control nuts are - many of them carry guns, and/or are protected by armed guards. Why would such a person be in favor of gun control? Because the laws they want to pass would allow them to keep their guns and their armed guards, and take away your guns - that is a very clear transfer of power. Why are those people better than you? Gun control is entirely based on that premise - that some people deserve protection and nobody else does.”
AndyI52 on Dec 12, 2013 at 15:37:10
“You miss the point, it will make selling to felons without a back ground check also against the law and those that sell them to felons in private sales can not be prosecuted they can clam ignorance.. with background checks both seller and buyer can be prosecuted...and I'm not advocating more gn control I am advacating background checks,,, so your other argument has nothing to do with taking guns from those that should be able to legally buy them. and last I saw none of the gun control legislation said one word of what you claim.. they let honest people have guns.. it is not a power transfer, it is not based on the premise that some people deserve protection and nobody else does...”